Plinivs - Vol. 3 Ch. 18 - Anna
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Group Leader
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2019
- Messages
- 637
Imagine a world on which elephant teachers abolished slavery since the 1st century AD
Not again... Christians in Rome didn't meet in underground cisterns or catacombs in this time period. They were an open community until the persecution of Nero. Paul (who was modestly wealthy) wrote to them in the '50s asking for financial support and their first bishop Clement was an equestrian of some means. It wasn't until the persecution that the house churches had to move underground. The Romans didn't care about a podunk little Jewish cult setting up shop in Rome just like every other podunk little cult from the rest of the world.
Also, Jude wasn't written until after Nero's death and it's the one Epistle that we know diverges in theology and understanding of scripture in a clearly Judaic way. It would have been out of place in the mostly-Greek Roman community.
Also, Jude wasn't written until after Nero's death and it's the one Epistle that we know diverges in theology and understanding of scripture in a clearly Judaic way. It would have been out of place in the mostly-Greek Roman community.
@sssr I am glad that you are at least observant, considering the lengths I went to make the quotes scripturally accurate. I've read a majority of the Ante-Nicene Fathers and people like Schweitzer and Quispel, but Yamazaki/Miki are evidently embracing the romantic notions of peplum films like Quo Vadis.
The epistles as we have them most certainly would preserve ancient doxologies and phraseologies that predate their specific application in a text. Here "building up" is an obvious Pauline metaphor (cf. Hermas) that entwines perfectly with the previous statements. (I also slipped in a reference to Thomas à Kempis, which is quite a bit more anachronistic!)
And what scholar is so bold as to definitely state that Clement of Rome is Titus Flavius Clemens, if this is what you imply?
The epistles as we have them most certainly would preserve ancient doxologies and phraseologies that predate their specific application in a text. Here "building up" is an obvious Pauline metaphor (cf. Hermas) that entwines perfectly with the previous statements. (I also slipped in a reference to Thomas à Kempis, which is quite a bit more anachronistic!)
And what scholar is so bold as to definitely state that Clement of Rome is Titus Flavius Clemens, if this is what you imply?
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2018
- Messages
- 4,037
@OmegaKaiser very nice name bruh, also keep up the good work!
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2018
- Messages
- 1,971
@sssr - there were still cults that met in secret to preserve their rites and rituals for outsiders - and if Christians are preaching "there is no slave or free" to slaves, maybe they'd choose to be more surreptitious? But fair point, I'm glad to see there's serious discussion of the historic Church in these comments!
@sylvacoer Colossians 3:22 and Ephesians 6:55 "Slaves, obey thy earthly masters" sounds like something the Roman church would have been preaching. We know from Romans that in Paul's time the Roman church leadership were already gentiles and that he wasn't well-known to them. Paul himself preached brotherly love but not equality between master and slave as we can tell from Galatians, although he seems to have also advocated emancipation in Philemon. We have to remember that Galatians 3:28 starts with "There is no Jew or gentile, slave or free" yet the rest of Galatians argue that there should be separate rules for Jews and gentiles. In that context, Paul wasn't saying slaves should have equality with the free, nor that the same rules applied to them, just that both should be brothers in Christ. Also, he's deliberately putting slaves there to parallel Jews as a strong rhetorical stab at his Jamesian rivals. Jews = slaves, gentiles = free.
I have read in particular Robert Eisenman's take on the James-Paul rivalry. But my personal opinion is that the majority of the NT epistles were worked over in the 2nd century as a response to various heresies; Clement of Alexandria at least thought Jude was "prophetically" referring to the Carpocratians. We can see this happened later with the Ignatian epistles where we still have the "middle" and "long" versions where Christian(s) added their own spins on emerging dogma.
Personally, I'm holding out for an appearance from Simon Magus, but I won't hold my breath.
Personally, I'm holding out for an appearance from Simon Magus, but I won't hold my breath.
@Thelele I think we'll see Peter (or maybe already did) just because the author's sources are probably filtered through her Italian husband.
As for Eisenmann, he definitely overexaggerates the James-Paul rivalry, but scholarly consensus agrees that there was definitely one. The question is just how intense that rivalry was. Eisenmann isn't the only one who supports the James vs. Paul conjecture. Ehrman, Crossan, and even White agree that there was a disagreement, although Crossan and White obviously have a more positive view of Paul and see him as attempting to maintain unity.
As for Eisenmann, he definitely overexaggerates the James-Paul rivalry, but scholarly consensus agrees that there was definitely one. The question is just how intense that rivalry was. Eisenmann isn't the only one who supports the James vs. Paul conjecture. Ehrman, Crossan, and even White agree that there was a disagreement, although Crossan and White obviously have a more positive view of Paul and see him as attempting to maintain unity.
@sssr Ah, but Ehrman rejects any connection between Clement and Flavius Clemens, so I suspected you were taking a more radical position. Either way, there is an important footnote in his Forgery and Counterforgery that points out that Jude's use of "faith" belongs to a conspicuously later age, and thus you will be happy to know I have relented and revised the line to something more in line with the Japanese text. However, the first part of it, "全能の神を信じて," is far too close to the Apostles' Creed for even me to accept, so I have taken a slight bit of liberty here.
@Thelele Wow, wait. I'm not complaining about your translation. I think it's great already. I just disagree with Mari herself perpetuating Christian myths.
I'm referring to the Clementine tradition of the Orthodoxy that Pope Clement I, supposed author of the Epistle to the Corinthians, was a rich "nobleman" who went to Jerusalem with Peter and later traveled around as a sort of church organizer and financier. This Clement (not Titus Flavius Clemens) has been posited by scholars as being an equestrian of some means who helped the Roman church establish their influence throughout the Greco-Roman north by giving donatives to their brethren. His epistle clearly suggests that at least he himself thought he had authority to guide the older Corinthian church. Of course the problem with this interpretation is that we don't know whether the tradition preceded the non-canonical Clementine literature and was used by the anti-Pauline faction or was instead formed by them.
Also, that baby is going to grow up to be the first definitive outside witness to the existence of Christianity in the first century, so I can see why there would be some interest in inserting a bit of Christianity into his uncle's story. I just wish she'd be more up-to-date on it.
I'm referring to the Clementine tradition of the Orthodoxy that Pope Clement I, supposed author of the Epistle to the Corinthians, was a rich "nobleman" who went to Jerusalem with Peter and later traveled around as a sort of church organizer and financier. This Clement (not Titus Flavius Clemens) has been posited by scholars as being an equestrian of some means who helped the Roman church establish their influence throughout the Greco-Roman north by giving donatives to their brethren. His epistle clearly suggests that at least he himself thought he had authority to guide the older Corinthian church. Of course the problem with this interpretation is that we don't know whether the tradition preceded the non-canonical Clementine literature and was used by the anti-Pauline faction or was instead formed by them.
Also, that baby is going to grow up to be the first definitive outside witness to the existence of Christianity in the first century, so I can see why there would be some interest in inserting a bit of Christianity into his uncle's story. I just wish she'd be more up-to-date on it.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2018
- Messages
- 2,487
@Thelele @sssr Thank you both for posting your discussion. I'll admit that 99% of it was WAY over my head, as I'm not a scriptural scholar in the least. But I enjoyed seeing how these matters affect scanlation choices, as well as serving as an impromptu analysis of the author's interpretation of history. Furthermore, your short little discussion was a wonderful example of a debate on religious/historical matters based on vague, biased, incomplete, or contradictory sources carried out with no rancor or name-calling. Kudos to you both on that score.
Unfortunately, I do not have the resources to find what unnamed scholars are being referred to for this Clement assertion, at least as far as works go in English, so I cannot add anything to this discussion...but it sure sounds like a tradition related to the Clementine literature.
But that baby is definitely gonna sentence some Galileans to death
But that baby is definitely gonna sentence some Galileans to death
Similar threads
